WHO lamenting about terminology? [BE/BA News]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2020-12-07 16:35 (1673 d 11:12 ago) – Posting: # 22124
Views: 7,189

Dear Helmut,

❝ Coming back to the WHO’s rant:

The calculation of the 90% confidence interval (CI) of the mean test/comparator ratio for the primary PK parameters should not be confused with the two one-sided t-tests employed to reject the null hypothesis of non-equivalence. The end result is the same, but these are not the same calculations.


❝ IMHO, they are just fed up reading “TOST” whilst the CI inclusion approach acc. to the GL was actually performed.


Totally correct to lament about that fact, I think. It should unequivocally described in the protocol or the SAP which calculations will be done :yes:. The CI approach will be the favorite I think. It is requested in all guidelines about BE studies, if I dont err.

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,428 posts in 4,929 threads, 1,687 registered users;
82 visitors (0 registered, 82 guests [including 14 identified bots]).
Forum time: 04:48 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority
is not using his intelligence;
he is just using his memory.    Leonardo da Vinci

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5